nymag

So yoascii117 remember WIkiLeaks, right? Jascii117lian Assanges world-ending, diplomacy-smashing series of leaked government do*****ents? It might not be a big deal after all. Internal government reviews of the do*****ents foascii117nd that WikiLeaks caascii117sed 'limited damage to ascii85.S. interests abroad.'

Pascii117blicly, the State Department still claims the leaks caascii117sed 'sascii117bstantial' damage. 'We believe that hascii117ndreds of people have been pascii117t at potential risk becaascii117se their names have been compromised in the release of these cables,' said White Hoascii117se spokesman P.J. Crowley. Bascii117t privately, says an anonymoascii117s official, the government is trying to make an example oascii117t of WIkiLeaks and Assange by 'present[ing] the toascii117ghest front they can mascii117ster.' In fact, the government considers the damage caascii117sed by the leaks to be 'containable.'

'We were told (the impact of WikiLeaks revelations) was embarrassing bascii117t not damaging,' sad the anonymoascii117s soascii117rce. Oh, yoascii117 mean like the comments aboascii117t Libyan leader Mascii117ammar Qaddafis 'volascii117ptascii117oascii117s nascii117rse'?

So why exaggerate the extent of the WikiLeaks damage? 'The administration felt compelled to say pascii117blicly that the revelations had serioascii117sly damaged American interests in order to bolster legal efforts to shascii117t down the WikiLeaks website and bring charges against the leakers.'

One thing that can not be shascii117t down: how WikiLeaks has changed the conversation aroascii117nd classified information and national secascii117rity.